Ahmadinejad-too far this time

This is gonna get really bad, really fast.

Seizure unjustified, Iran warned
Iran's detention of 15 Royal Navy personnel is "unjustified and wrong", Prime Minister Tony Blair has said.
UK officials are waiting to be granted access to the HMS Cornwall staff, who were seized on Friday, and have not been told where the group are held.

Hardline students close to Iran's president have called for the sailors to be put on trial.

Iran says they were trespassing in its waters, but speaking at an EU summit, Mr Blair denied this was the case.

"It simply is not true that they went into Iranian territorial waters and I hope the Iranian government understands how fundamental an issue this is for us," Mr Blair said.

"We have certainly sent the message back to them very clearly indeed. They should not be under any doubt at all about how seriously we regard this act, which is unjustified and wrong."

The prime minister, in Berlin for the EU's 50th anniversary celebrations, said he had not commented up to now because he wanted the incident to be resolved in "as easy and diplomatic a way as possible".

He added: "It is the welfare of the people that have been taken by the Iranian government that is most important."

BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera said officials in the Foreign Office were stepping up their efforts to free the sailors and marines.

But they acknowledged that negotiations with Iran can be both delicate and difficult.

'Wider crisis'

It is also feared that the fate of the captured personnel has become part of a wider crisis centring on Iran's nuclear programme, our correspondent said.

On Saturday, the UN Security Council voted unanimously in favour of further sanctions against Iran for its refusal to suspend its nuclear enrichment programme.

And on Sunday evening Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, responded that it would restrict co-operation with international inspectors.

Elsewhere, Iranian Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, told reporters in New York that the captured Britons were involved in "the illegal entrance into Iranian territorial waters and this issue is being considered legally".

Students belonging to the paramilitary Basij group, which is close to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, have called for the Britons to be put on trial.

But the Foreign Office is adamant that the 15 were in Iraqi waters and has called for their immediate release.

Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett had a telephone conversation with her Iranian counterpart during the evening.

A spokesman said she made it "very clear" that no violation of Iranian waters had occurred. She also appealed for information on the whereabouts of the group and for consular access.

The navy personnel, who include one woman, were seized at gunpoint by forces said to be Iranian Revolutionary Guards, after inspecting an Iraqi boat and returning to their two small boats to head back to the Cornwall.

Germany - which holds the EU presidency - has called for the immediate release of the Britons.

The seizure of the boarding party carries echoes of an incident in June 2004 when a group of eight marines and sailors were held for three days after being seized by the Iranians in the Shatt al-Arab waterway.

I don't know if he will become the default leader of the middle eastern states, but the comments about the US not having the means to occupy both Iraq and Iran is certainly true.

The first thing that caught my attention as this started to unfold however, was that this act was purportrated against British Troops. Britain is currently in Iraq with a medium-sized deployment, and they have some troop reserves still to mobilize if need be. Since this could be considered much more "legitimate" by Europe and the NATO allies, it could generate the type of coalition necessary to pull this off.

The big question is will it get that far, and will Europe have the political will to publicly back the US and Britian after seeing the mess that Iraq has turned into.

Honestly, I don't want to see Iran with Nukes, but I really don't know if you can justify a very messy war to stop it. The NPT is 37 years old. You cannot hold this technology at bay forever. Even the US has been searching for ways around the ban, so they can determine if their nuclear weapons even work anymore.

Combine that with the fact that North Korea and others have young programs that could be stepped up in time of war, and I think this is going to be an act in futility. We still don't know where China will come in on the issue if push comes to shove, and the conflict regionalizes either.

My prediction. If Iran simply makes a political fuss and sends the troops home, the usual political posturing will resume "business as usual" until Iran slowly develops a program under much UN fuss: ala North Korea.

If Iran does something stupid, this will blow up faster than we can imagine, and we're all going to be in this thing for a penny and a pound.

I hope to see the sailors and marines returned safely. I personally have had a few drinks aboard the HMS Cornwall and became good friends with another sailor aboard her when I was a squid. I cherished my experience alongside the British sailors.

As for this fiasco...I feel it is Iran, trying to play bad boy in the region and to use the sailors and marines as pawns in their game of chess for nuclear enrichment. As for war...I don't know. makes me wonder if Iran, N. Korea, and Venezuela would be doing what they are doing if the U.S. wasn't so committed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Everyone has their own opinions on the war. I just hope it works out for the sailors I've shared several beers with.

Hmmm very interesting. When I was in the Gulf during the early stages of OP APPOLLO/ENDURING FREEDOM, we sailed past the Iranian coast very often. Occasionally we were shadowing a "vessel of interest" while doing so. Of course that vessel only too commonly was just INSIDE the Iranian sovereignty limits OF COURSE Also, pretty much every day, between 1500 and 1630 an Iranian P3 would buzz us, and "paint" us up with their radars. Kinda unnerving that part, at least for the first week or so....

Anyhow during one trip back up from the Strait of Hormuz we picked up a VOI, and at one point we got chased by three Iranian gun boats and the P3. Seems that they didnt like us following the freighter along their coastline for some reason.

So right or wrong, and of course we dont (wont) know the full details of what the Brits were up to, but being caught and detained by the Iranians is really not much of a surprise for some reason. Those guys take their "sovereignty" pretty seriously.

Aegis equipped ships have a unique way of dealing with harassment:crank up the radar and aim the beam down the bearing of the incoming plane or ship.They have upwards of a million watts of transmitting power,from what I've been told in the 1980s.
That messes with electronic equipment and certain levels of electronic radiation scrambles your head can and can cause other physiological effects.
The short version is,don't **** off an Aegis if you don't want funny looking kids.

This might sound like a Tom Clancy novel,but it could be that Iran is trying to divert attention from another problem spot in the world(who else catigates President Bush and the US and is trying to avoid UN scrutiny?) while the other country carries out a dastardly evil plot?

[QUOTE=MalahatTwo7;789626]Hmmm very interesting. When I was in the Gulf during the early stages of OP APPOLLO/ENDURING FREEDOM, we sailed past the Iranian coast very often. Occasionally we were shadowing a "vessel of interest" while doing so. Of course that vessel only too commonly was just INSIDE the Iranian sovereignty limits OF COURSE Also, pretty much every day, between 1500 and 1630 an Iranian P3 would buzz us, and "paint" us up with their radars. Kinda unnerving that part, at least for the first week or so....
Anyhow during one trip back up from the Strait of Hormuz we picked up a VOI, and at one point we got chased by three Iranian gun boats and the P3. Seems that they didnt like us following the freighter along their coastline for some reason.
QUOTE]

While I personally have no problem with your thoughts and potential solution, Doug, in the interests of "Professional Courtesy" and "Diplomatic Relations" (and the R.O.E at the time) your suggestions would have been returned with extreme violence. We just kinda hunkered down, cleared the upper decks of unnecessary personel, closed up the .50's and main armaments and just kinda sat quietly. It was one of those "wait till they shoot us" scenarios. And it TRULY SUCKED. But with more than 500 Allied fighting ships in the Gulf at that time..... they would have been very stupid to try anything more than just "buzzing" us.

And since I am still "here" I am very happy that my boat never got shot out from under me!

While I personally have no problem with your thoughts and potential solution, Doug, in the interests of "Professional Courtesy" and "Diplomatic Relations" (and the R.O.E at the time) your suggestions would have been returned with extreme violence. We just kinda hunkered down, cleared the upper decks of unnecessary personel, closed up the .50's and main armaments and just kinda sat quietly. It was one of those "wait till they shoot us" scenarios. And it TRULY SUCKED. But with more than 500 Allied fighting ships in the Gulf at that time..... they would have been very stupid to try anything more than just "buzzing" us.
And since I am still "here" I am very happy that my boat never got shot out from under me!

I know that's what would have happened.You don't know that a radar is being aimed at you to find out how far away you are or to get range,elevation and windage for a Terrier shot.
Still,it lets someone inbound know that you know where they are and care enough to keep an eye on them,no matter what the power level is.
One of my scariest moments in early 1987 in the Med off Libya was hearing and seeing the chaff launchers going off just before the GQ gong rang.
We get our battlestations to "Repair 5,manned and ready" just as the Captain comes on the 1MC to cancel the alarm.
It turned out that a new F/A 18 turned on its radar system to practice a surface intercept and the OS(Operations Specialist-radar guy)saw it on his scope and didn't want to take the chance.
The radar in question was supposedly the same mounted on an Exocet type anti ship missile.

Well I can tell ya. It weren't too happy the first time they did that to us. Much like as you describe for when the chaff launchers went off. We didnt drop any chaff or other ordinance but the ole adrenaline sure got running when the action alarm went off...... After the 3rd or 4th day we started to take it as "routine" other than as described. The EW guys got lots of practice as did the gun crews but thats about it.

This mutt has been itching for a fight for a long time. I do not want to even imagine what is going to happen if he allows one of those soldiers to be injurerd or killed.

George, I agree with your read of Iran and Azurburwhatever but the sad truth is, unless (maybe even if) he beheads them live on CNN, nothing is going to happen. Here's why:

1) Europe doesn't have the capability. All the militaries of western Europe combined do not have the ability to project force in a hostile region. Absent a land base, their entire air support would be similar in numbers to a single US carrier air wing but far more limited in capabilities. They also don't have modern escort vessels or the ability to logistically support large forces in the field. The US Navy is a different story. If they asked and we agreed, we could easily provide adequate sea and air muscle BUT once again Europe doesn't have the land forces to do much more than get a lot of folks killed. We wouldn't be nearly as helpful here because of our committments in Iran and Afghanistan. If we stripped our remaining forces bare, it might just be enough but it wouldn't be pretty.

2) Europe can't afford it. Right now the UK is bleeding money with their Iraq deployments. They're even talking about further downsizing their forces. Almost all other European military forces have been reduced to the point where they are little more than tokens. If they can't buy bombs and bullets to store for a rainy day, they sure can't buy them to expend in Iran.

3) Europe is scared. Even in the modern jet age, we are still protected by a couple of big***** moats. Directly attacking us with either convential or unconvential forces takes time, extensive planning , and tons of money. Europe is right there, complete with an open borders policy and there are no Margaret Thatchers holding office across the pond.

Fifty or even only twenty-five years ago, the story would have probably been different but not today. Appeasement is back.

We spent 43 days riding along the 32 degrees,30 minutes line that Kaddaffi decreed was a line of death for the US Navy.We zipped back up to Italy on the 44/45th day.The whole time we were at"Modified Zebra"which is the hatches are down and dogged but we can freely use the scuttles to get around.All weapons stations had a watch on them and lookouts were expected to keep their eyes in the binoculars and had better beat the OOD in spotting things.(that lookout part is normal anyway)
We crossed it a few times and one night I reported lights on the horizon that I was told were the town of Benghazi's.
By the time President Reagan ordered the bomb runs,we had outchopped from 6th fleet back to 2nd and were 2 days out of Charleston SC when the word came about it.

Originally Posted by MalahatTwo7

Well I can tell ya. It weren't too happy the first time they did that to us. Much like as you describe for when the chaff launchers went off. We didnt drop any chaff or other ordinance but the ole adrenaline sure got running when the action alarm went off...... After the 3rd or 4th day we started to take it as "routine" other than as described. The EW guys got lots of practice as did the gun crews but thats about it.

The history books tell us that the intellectuals and media made great fun throwing insults at Churchill and Roosevelt for their idiocy in thinking Hitler was a threat.

I'm thinking that the history books will note the ironic parallel between that period of history and the current way that President Bush and Tony Blair are working together. Ahmadinejad is the closest thing we have seento Hitler in my lifetime.

We, the German Fuhrer and Chancellor, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today and are agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for our two countries and for Europe.

"We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.

We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries, and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference, and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe.

My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honor. I believe it is "peace for our time." Go home and get a nice quiet sleep."

I'm thinking that the history books will note the ironic parallel between that period of history and the current way that President Bush and Tony Blair are working together. Ahmadinejad is the closest thing we have seen to Hitler in my lifetime.

There certainly are some scary parallels. Though I think Hitler was more subtle prior to 1939 then Ahmadinejad which makes me wonder why people think the same reaction will work again. "Fool me once...", etc, etc.

There are also some differences that may make this situation worse: The US is entangled in two other conflicts, our domestic production is far less, and the surrounding region hates us. How would WWII ended if the US had been at war with France and hated by Britain, Poland, Spain, and Russia when Germany was getting uppity?

Malahat, the "Peace for Our Time" quote resulted from a conference about Germany's decision to annex part of Czechoslovakia via the Panzer method.

Less that two weeks earlier, Germany sent tanks into Czechoslovakia. Western Europe responded immediately by sending strong notes of protest. Gee, that sounds a lot like how the international community wants to handle Iran and North Korea, doesn't it?

Just for the record, strong notes of protest worked as well in 1938 as they do today. Not only did Germany keep what they had taken by occupation, the western powers that should have been the Czech government's salvation forced them to cede even more territory to Hitler. The final injustice? Czechoslovakia didn't even have a seat at the conference table.

Originally Posted by GodSendRain

I can die happy, EFD, you own a history book! I bet half the people here are still wondering who the hell you're talking about.

Don't leave it lying around, some people like to doodle in them.

Not only do I own one, I've actually read it!

I do completely agree that efforts to appease him will only embolden him, as they did Hitler. I don't know if I'm quite ready to compare him to Hitler because Adolf never had a martyr complex like this dude and that may be more dangerous in the short term. One thing is certain, if Iran's efforts aren't checked, he will successfully develop nuclear weapons and then all bets are off. He just might be nuts enough to use one against Israel and we all know with certainty how Israel would respond.

All isn't lost. Ahmadinejad (like Hitler) was elected and doesn't yet have overwhelming public support. I hope everyone's intelligence services are working overtime to grow internal opposition groups so he can be retired by his electorate before he can pull his own Night of the Long Knives (that one's for you, GodSendRain).

Finally, I gotta say something else.

George, I start my mornings by sitting at my desk and drinking a nice cold Diet Coke. Posts like this one:

Didn't Neville Chamberlain play center for the Lakers?

cause me to choke on said Diet Coke. In the future, please make all efforts to warn me of the impending danger.

EFD, I am very familiar with the wartime and political history of that period. It was a major field of study when I was in skuul. And ya, I am in agreement of your general assessment and comparative comments between "Then" and "Now".

Its the Old United Nations (League of Nations) "Stop! Or I'll say "Stop" again" routine.

An Update From The Uk

TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran said the 15 British sailors and Marines it's holding are healthy and being treated in a humane fashion.

The Foreign Ministry spokesman says the only woman sailor among the group has been given privacy.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said there's "absolutely no justification whatsoever" for Iran to hold them.

"I hope we manage to get [Iran] to realise they have to release them," Blair said in an interview with GMTV, according to the British newspaper The Telegraph. "If not, then this will move into a different phase."

According to the newspaper, Blair didn't define what a "different phase" meant.

"Well, we will just have to see, but what they should understand is that we cannot have a situation where our servicemen and women are seized when actually they are in Iraqi waters under a UN mandate, patrolling perfectly rightly and in accordance with that mandate, and then effectively captured and taken to Iran," Blair said.

Iran said it seized the sailors because they trespassed into Iranian territory. Officials said they're interviewing the sailors to figure out whether they did so intentionally. But Britain said the sailors were in Iraqi waters.

EFD, I am very familiar with the wartime and political history of that period. It was a major field of study when I was in skuul. And ya, I am in agreement of your general assessment and comparative comments between "Then" and "Now".

Its the Old United Nations (League of Nations) "Stop! Or I'll say "Stop" again" routine.

I dunno about you but "PanzerKrieg Politics" always works for me.

No offense intended, Malahat. I got preachy because most folks think Germany's attack on Poland just came out of the blue when in fact he had been screaming his intentions from the mountaintop for years....

Europe's reaction to Hitler has always amazed me. He did Czechoslovakia, then Poland but somehow managed to hoodwink the low countries. Then, for the grand finale, he schmoozed Stalin so good that Uncle Joe wouldn't believe it when the plans for Barbarossa literally fell right into his hands.

Japan pulled one on us at Pearl Harbor, but that was due to our severe underestimation of their capabilities, not their intentions. Adolf managed to convince all those countries he meant no harm while he stood loading the rifle in plain view.